W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg@w3.org > January to March 2023

Re: signatures vs sf-date

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2023 06:14:06 +0100
Message-ID: <8523f06e-adfd-31e9-8539-107bdef24d2b@gmx.de>
To: Watson Ladd <watsonbladd@gmail.com>
Cc: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Lucas Pardue <lucaspardue.24.7@gmail.com>, ietf-http-wg@w3.org
On 05.02.2023 21:36, Watson Ladd wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 10:48 PM Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> <snip much context>
>> What I'm looking for is a strategy that avoid tons of flags in parsers,
>> and confusing APIs when using them.
> I'm a little confused by what you want. Is the situation the following:
> I put in a new kind of field for a new field My-Field. That new kind
> isn't understood by existing code, implementations that want My-Field
> to be parsed need to update their parser to parse the new kind.
 > ...

That's a simple approach. It works well for new code that wants to parse
new fields.

But what about existing code that just gets maintenance? If the parser
is updated (without any toggles), it will start accepting syntax it's
not supposed to accept (for that field).

Best regards, Julian
Received on Monday, 6 February 2023 05:14:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Monday, 6 February 2023 05:14:27 UTC